SDP's appeal for POFMA order rejected, 'SDP's statements are false': MHA

Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam has rejected an application by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) to vary the Correction Direction issued to them on Jun. 29, 2024.

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) appealed to Shanmugam on Apr. 8 to vary a Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) order against the party.

The order, issued on Jun. 29, 2024, instructed the party to publish a correction notice alongside its social media posts bearing two false statements.

The directive pertains to an SDP statement regarding the alleged case of three women involved in a procession to the Istana to deliver letters to the prime minister.

MHA rejects application

MHA said SDP complied with the order on Jun. 29, 2024, but submitted its application to appeal more than nine months later on Apr. 7, 2025.

"It explained in an accompanying statement that this was to raise issues 'ahead of the General Election'," MHA said in its press release.

The ministry yet again reiterated that SDP's posts on its social media accounts on Jun. 27 and 28, 2024, are false.

The order was issued against two statements made in the posts, one of which was that three women were prosecuted for organising support for a cause.

Another suggested that the government and a minister prosecuted the three women because they had expressed views that the government did not agree with.

No processions are allowed in the vicinity of the Istana

MHA said both statements are false, and that the three women were charged for organising a procession in the vicinity of the Istana, which does not allow such processions.

"Any person who organises a public assembly or a procession in a designated prohibited area would have committed an offence, regardless of the cause or issue he or she is advocating for."

Also, the decision to charge the three women was not made by Shanmugam, as the SDP posts had suggested.

Instead, the decision to charge the three women was made by the Attorney-General’s Chambers, after its review of the police’s investigative findings.

The minister does not make decisions relating to criminal prosecutions.

SDP appears to agree one of the statements it made was false: MHA

SDP had appealed for the first statement to be set aside in the order as their posts did not contain the content.

"SDP does not appeal against the Second Statement in the application, which appears to suggest that the SDP agrees that the statement it made was false," said MHA.

Shanmugam has assessed that there is no merit to the application and has rejected it, MHA noted.

SDP has been notified of the minister’s decision.

Top image via MHA and SDP/Facebook, sgforpalestine/Instagram